Shadowstalker16: Yes. If I recall she said she was ''going to prove sexism in video games'' which is both vague and intangible. And clearly different from at least a somewhat set goal of creating a game right? She offered an intangible goal as tangible and that is at least a bit anti-donater.
Although one probably does not need to prove it to know that sexism will very likely be present in at least some video games (after all sexism is almost everywhere) I could not find anywhere the "going to prove" part.
From the KS page of Tropes vs. Women: "This video project will explore, analyze and deconstruct some of the most common tropes and stereotypes of female characters in games. The series will highlight the larger recurring patterns and conventions used within the gaming industry .. Each video will be between 10 and 20 minutes long and available online for free ...I will be researching and playing hundreds of titles from across the gaming industry"
I just copied the tangible parts and many of them are actually fullfilled.
- video project (check)
- female characters in games (check)
- highlight some patterns and conventions (don't know but I guess if you talk about something repeatedly it counts as highlighting)
- video between 10 and 20 minutes long and free (check)
- playing hundreds of games (don't know, probably not)
Much research was actually not really promised anywhere. I don't want to defend her but I would say that there is at least one good thing about it, the discussion the whole series created, even although it was so bad, was actually necessary.
What should backers learn from it (and all the other cases like for example DoubleFine (not very fine)):
Back only if you trust the people and have good reason for it, back only late stage, detailed projects with lots of tangible information about likely outcomes, back only if you would also be comfortable to see your backing as a donation, don't back too much. Otherwise don't back at all.